627 F.3d 1101
9th Cir.2010Background
- Kathie Costanich, a long-time foster parent, had her foster care license revoked by DSHS following an investigation into alleged emotional abuse by Duron, a CPS social worker.
- An ALJ reversed the license revocation, and the Washington Court of Appeals affirmed that reversal; Costanich appealed further.
- Duron’s investigation and a declaration she filed in support of guardianship termination were challenged as fabrications, with genuine issues of fact alleged about the statements she made.
- The district court granted summary judgment for all DSHS personnel on federal claims based on immunity, while Costanich and DSHS cross-appealed.
- The Ninth Circuit held that Duron was not absolutely immune for the investigation and declaration, but was entitled to qualified immunity under the circumstances, and that license revocation officials were absolutely immune, with other officials enjoying qualified immunity on remaining claims.
- The opinion discusses whether a due process right not to be subjected to fabricated evidence exists and whether it was clearly established in civil foster care proceedings at the time of the conduct.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Immunity for license revocation officials | Costanich argues revocation officials violated due process by fabricating evidence. | DSHS officials claim absolute immunity for initiating license revocation. | License revocation officials have absolute immunity. |
| Duron’s investigation and declaration as to guardianship | Duron deliberately fabricated evidence, violating due process. | Duron sought to investigate and declare, but raised qualified immunity issues. | Duron is not absolutely immune; fabrications may violate due process and qualify for liability, but right not clearly established at the time. |
| Whether the fabrications violated a clearly established right | There was a clearly established right not to be subjected to fabricated evidence in civil proceedings. | No clearly established right in civil foster care context existed at the time. | Right not clearly established in 2001; qualified immunity affirmed for Duron. |
| Remaining claims against other DSHS officials | Other officials knew of errors and relied on the investigation to terminate guardianship. | Record does not show deliberate fabrication by others; not clearly established rights. | Judgment affirmed for other officials on qualified immunity. |
Key Cases Cited
- Beltran v. Santa Clara County, 514 F.3d 906 (9th Cir. 2008) (social workers get absolute immunity for initiating custody proceedings; fabrication not protected)
- Devereaux v. Abbey, 263 F.3d 1070 (9th Cir. 2001) (deliberate fabrication of evidence violates due process; not limited to criminal context)
- Miller v. Gammie, 335 F.3d 889 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc; specific function, not role, controls absolute immunity)
- Kalina v. Fletcher, 522 U.S. 118 (U.S. 1997) (limits absolute immunity to the function performed, not official title)
- Pyle v. Kansas, 317 U.S. 213 (U.S. 1942) (prosecution use of perjured testimony violates due process; clearly established analog)
- Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 (U.S. 1987) (objective reasonableness for qualified immunity; clearly established inquiry)
- Jones v. State, 170 Wash.2d 338 (Wash. 2010) (state licensees have due process/property interest; right not clearly established in civil context at time)